Rabbi Dr. Norman Lamm ל"צז: Memories and Reflections

Volume 24, Issue 28 Yeshiva University High School For Boys 4 Tamuz 5780 e Marsha Stern Talmudical Academy שמע קולנו ”יתגבר כארי לעמוד בבוקר לעבודת בוראו“ Special Edition

:זצ"ל Rabbi Dr. Norman Lamm Memories and Reflections Rabbi Mayer Schiller

Author’s Note: On Sunday, June 7th, I delivered a hesped for Rabbi Lamm over Zoom. What follows is a transcript of that talk, edited and annotated. Yeoman’s work was done in the transcription and editing by Yisroel Hochman, Yeshurin Sorscher and Shimi Kaufman, MTA talmidim. The latter, in particular, invested much time, energy and insight into the process. I am very grateful to them for this and much else. Their interest in Torah and avodah has inspired me throughout the years. We tried to keep the flavor of the spoken words’ intimacy while tightening the presentation. It was not a simple task. The success of our hybridization remains for the reader to judge.

Introduction

The Slonimer sefer, Toras Avos, has a section called Klalei Emunas Chachamim. The first klal, from Rav Avraham Slonimer (1804 - 1883), begins with, “When Hashem places before you and singles out for you a man according to the yearnings of your heart, that person is one you should attach yourself to.”1 In a similar vein, the Zohar writes that when you find a man “who touches you spiritually, you are obligated to attach yourself to him and learn from him.”2 Rabbi Lamm was, for me, that man. He was the man whom Hashem prepared for me, “according to the yearnings” of my heart.

It is my hope in these pages to examine who this man was, his yesodos (basic beliefs) in avodas Hashem, his impact on me personally, and his relevance for future generations. We will begin with a brief biographical sketch of his life. Rabbi Lamm was born in 1927 in Williamsburg, Brookyln, before the community became the Chareidi stronghold it is today. His parents were hardworking Galitziana Yidden, who opted to send him to Yeshiva Torah Vodaath. (Torah Vodaath was quite different back then than it is today, often taking the talmidim to Ebbets Field and (alas) Yankee Stadium, and to first-run Broadway films, such as Shirley Temple’s Stowaway (1937). One is left to wonder how Rabbi Lamm, who had zero interest in sports and, probably, none in Shirley Temple movies, was able to get out of those trips, if he did.)3 After graduating, he spent a year learning with his zayde, Rav Yehoshua Baumol (1880 - 1948), a year which he described to me personally as “the sweetest year of his life.”4 In the evenings, he read “a good deal of philosophy and all of Freud, Jung, and Ad-

2 e ler.”5 After a year, his zayde, a Chasid- ishe rov who had served as the pre- World War I Vizhnitzer Rosh Yeshiva, told him that he should go to learn “bay dem Soloveitchik Gaon.” He listened, and left to attend Yeshiva College. He majored in chemistry, which remained a lifelong love of his. Upon graduating, he spent some time studying chemistry at Brooklyn Polytechnic Institute6, until Dr. Belkin persuaded him to return to Yeshiva Rabbi Lamm (Left) with his Rav Hamuvhak, Rav and pursue semicha. After receiving his Yosha Ber Soloveitchik (The Rav) (Right) semicha, he became the assistant Rabbi Portrait of Rav Yehoshua Baumol to Rabbi Joseph Lookstein (1902 - 1979) in Kehilath Jeshurun, as well as teaching at its affiliate, the Ramaz School. He then continued on to serve as Rabbi Lamm’s grandfather pulpit Rabbi for the Kadimah Synagogue in Springfield, Massachusetts, the West Side Jewish Center, and the Jewish Center in the West Side (two different places), where he remained the Rav until becoming the president of Yeshiva University (YU) in 1976. In 1958 he served as the founder and first editor of Tradition: A Journal of Orthodox Jewish Thought, a position he held until 1962.7 He also completed his PhD, a study of the derech (philosophy) of Rav Chaim Volozhiner as presented in his magnum opus, the Nefesh Hachaim. Rav Soloveitchik acted both as his PhD advisor and the person who gave him semicha, the only time this ever occurred. He served as President of YU from 1976 to 2003, and, then as Chancellor until 2013, whereupon he stepped down into a well-deserved retirement. Throughout the years he also authored eleven books and hundreds of articles, as well as delivering countless droshos, lectures, and shiurim.

A bit of an autobiographical digression: I became Orthodox at age twelve, and my goal was to eventually become a fully functioning Skverer Chossid, with all which that implied.8 As part of the process, I first attended Breuers’ (Yeshivas Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch) in ninth grade (1965), went on to Mesivta Beis Shraga of Monsey in eleventh grade (1967), and then finally on to the Skverer yeshiva (1969) at age 17. I got married there, and learned in the kollel for six years. This varied trek through assorted institutions is significant, as I came to understand early on that, within the world of Orthodoxy, there were different camps, each with slightly different apprehensions of Torah and reality. The only way I was able to process this was to develop what I call the theory of primary and secondary belief systems. The primary belief systems are those that all Torah Jews believe in. They are the Orthodox beliefs expressed by the Rambam in the Ikarei Emunah (Thirteen Principles of Faith), and the Orthoprax observances outlined by the Shulchan Aruch.9 The secondary belief systems are the derivative notions rooted in the guidance of leaders, logic, text, and/or social context, which re- sult in disagreement between the camps of Orthodoxy. This seemed to me a simple and basic truth: All Orthodox Jews agree on the basics, and argue on some of the non-essential issues. 10

Because of this view, when I was in Skver, I was often called upon -- rather, I called upon myself -- to defend those Orthodox thinkers and leaders who stood outside of the normative Chareidi world. This often focused on Rav Abraham Isaac Kook (1865 - 1935), who, in the heimishe velt, is viewed as anywhere from a rasha gamur to a silly man with silly beliefs.11

At the same time, I was also learning and working with many of the yeshiva’s weaker talmidim on a voluntary basis. A member of the Kehillah administration wanted to hire me to do this in an official capacity, but one of the other Roshei Kehillah felt I was unfit due to what he had heard of my de- fense of Rav Kook. Because of this controversy, both parties came to my house to interrogate me. The meeting went reasonably well, until the prosecuting Rosh Kehillah discovered a sefer by Necha- ma Leibowitz on Chumash, thus, effectively ending my chances of being hired.

This is just one example of my feeling that, despite relishing the world of Skver, its box was just a bit

3 e too restrictive. In order to expand beyond these limitations, when I read any book on any subject, I would frequently call the author and have a conversation with him about his world-view. I must have called well over fifty authors, and almost all were incredibly gracious in talking with me.12 At that time, I would also occasionally venture to the Lower East Side, where there were an assortment of now-extinct seforim stores that had every sefer, book, and journal that you could imagine.13 On one of these trips, I picked up Rabbi Lamm’s Faith And Doubt. I began to read on the way home, and I immediately recognized, in the words of Joe Stromer (1952 - 2002), of the Clash, upon hearing punk rock for the first time at London’s 100 Club, that it was “a whole new thing, man, a whole new thing.” I was completely fascinated and taken by the book, and I spent a day reading through it and taking copious notes. I had a lot of questions immediately and, so, that night, I called Rabbi Lamm to see to what degree he could soothe my soul’s turbulence.

At this point, I have to interweave my memories with what Mrs. Mindela Lamm recalled to me years later. Apparently, Rabbi Lamm and his wife were poised to go out that night, and had already donned their coats. As they were about to leave, I called and explained that I had a few questions for Rabbi Lamm. Mrs. Lamm told this to her husband, who said that he would simply explain to me that he was about to leave and give me a time to call back. I asked him my questions, and he began to become engaged with answering me. As Mrs. Lamm put it, “When my husband first sat down, I got nervous. When he began to slip off the left sleeve of his coat, I got really nervous. When he had taken his coat off fully, I realized we were not going to be going out that night.”14 That first conversation lasted until well past midnight, about three plus hours. Many such conversations followed, and wherever I wanted to go in the world of hashkafa, he was both willing to and capable of meeting me there. Whatever I wished to discuss, from the nature of medrash to the morality of halacha he was ready to play, and with extensive knowledge of almost every topic. He invited me to come speak at a course he was teaching on Jewish philosophy at the Erna Michael (today: Isaac Bruer) College of Yeshiva University, and he introduced me as “my dear friend whom I have never met.” He encour- aged me to write my book, The Road Back, and edited the pages of my handwritten manuscript which I sent him weekly. He served as both content and copy editor, wielding his red pen without mercy. In the year in which he was being considered for the presidency of YU, I sent him my usual ten or so pages of the book, and received back a letter from him a few days later. The letter read, “Due to events cascading down upon me, I was unable to edit the usual number of pages this week. Please accept these two or three pages, and I hope to get back on track soon.” While being considered for the most important position in his career, he found the time to edit pages of my book!

He remained my mentor and friend throughout the years. When I was preparing to begin as a rebbi in Yeshiva High School of Queens (YHSQ), he wanted, instead, to bring me to Yeshiva College as some sort of professor. A meeting was arranged for me with several Yeshiva College deans. I pro- posed a course in Jewish philosophy, which I had outlined on 30 handwritten pages, brought in my tattered briefcase. At the time, they were unable to overcome the jarring chitzoiniyusdik (external) picture of this “out-of-touch chossid,” so I did not receive the appointment.15

In sum, at a point in my life when I wanted to have Skverer chas- sidus while still wrestling with the highways and byways of philosophy, history, literature, and similar disciplines, Rabbi Lamm taught me that these pursuits can be part of avodas Hashem. As he often put it ”Hashem is the God of revelation and creation.“ In a sense, he was the person I needed to make my approach to the Ribono Shel Olam personally more meaningful and com- plete.

Rabbi Lamm c.1960s

4 e Worldview

Now I’d like to move on to Rabbi Lamm’s worldview. Here, I have to quote Yogi Berra. Many of the Yogi-isms that have been passed down to us are cute and humorous, but several have a profound chochmah (wisdom) to them.16 Yogi was famous for saying, “When you come to a fork in the road, take it.” This is a yesod for understanding Rabbi Lamm's thinking. When you encounter different ap- proaches or understandings, choose to take the whole thing, the gantze zach. Don't just single out one side of “the road.”

Yet, despite, or maybe because of, the breadth of his wisdom, Rabbi Lamm’s basic “primary beliefs” never faltered. In 1966, Commentary did a symposium on Jewish belief, where Rabbi Lamm’s responses were featured. All the major yesodos of Rabbi Lamm’s philosophy appear there: The Torah is divine, it is Godly, there is Godliness in the learning of Torah and practice of mitzvos, and hala- chos are binding despite any societal pressures.17 Thirty-three years later, Commentary offered a similar symposium, and Rabbi Lamm hit almost the exact same points!18 Thirty-three years between these two statements, and, throughout it all, his core principles remained the same. These basic dogmas are essential to understanding Rabbi Lamm’s assorted particularistic outlooks.

Among Rabbi Lamm’s beliefs were those matters which I referred to earlier as “derivative Torah”. Rabbi Lamm had four main points which he viewed as essential to the belief system of Centrist Or- thodoxy: Zionism, inclusiveness, Torah Umadda, and moderation. In later decades, women's issues also became central to his thinking. These were his derivative constants; these were what he said made his community and mehalech unique. To be sure, he was not a simplifier who believed in his mehalech without nuance and further reflection, or a dogmatist who viewed his as the only correct way within Orthodoxy.

His Zionism was a good example of this. The early 1970s saw me sitting in the office of the Jewish Foundation School in Staten Island, waiting to meet somebody, where I came upon a back issue of Tradition, which featured a symposium on the Six-Day War. Rabbi Lamm wrote therein, shortly after the war, when all world Jewry were still euphoric from the victory and we could walk the streets of Shechem without fear. In the midst of that ecstasy, Rabbi Lamm was careful to say that he didn’t want to root his faith in Messianic predictions, or to proclaim that there would be no setbacks and defeats in the future. He was careful to say that these are worldly matters, and we cannot raise them to the status of ikarei emunah.19 Of course, when the ‘73 war came around, it was revealed that there was great chochmah in that statement. Rabbi Lamm always studiously avoided making any Messianic statements, or any statements that could be invalidated later on. To be sure, his Zionism was a very serious one (he served as honorary President of Mizrachi), but it was also not dogmatic. He did not assert more than a mortal being could possibly assert.20 It was a Zionism, but a Zionism of reflection and moderation.21

Then there was his inclusiveness. The goal of his inclusiveness was, as he wrote, “to include all Jews to the degree that it was ha- lachically possible.”22 He was always trying to create methods to address matters of halacha with the utmost sensitivity and respect towards all types of Jews. This is in no way to say, as some might mistakenly assert, that he was willing to accept alternative “Jewish” streams of thought, such as those allowing patrilineal de- scent, legitimizing deviant sexual forms, or denying the divine nature of Torah. He was very staunch in denying all the overt and covert heresies in these movements.23 However, he was always Rabbi Lamm speaking at the dedication of trying to find ways to draw these Jews into authentic Judaism, and Yeshiva University’s Jacob And Draizel Glueck Center For Jewish Study (September 13, 2009) this led him to many interesting positions throughout his career. There was a point where he attempted to create a means where-

5 e by all Reform and Conservative conversions would be subject to an Orthodox beis din. This was a complicated process that ended up not coming to fruition,24 but he was always attempting to bring all Jews into one large umbrella of Klal Yisrael. This also extended to other forms of Orthodoxy. He was very keen to assert that all manifestations and forms of Orthodoxy were legitimate. In a lecture on Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch, he declared that the pursuit of “Torah only”25 must find the dialectical place for “Torah Im Derech Eretz”, and “Torah Im Derech Eretz” must find a dialectical place for “Torah only.” Rabbi Lamm believed that this mutual concession would yield a vision not unlike his own holistic world-view. This is exactly what I felt in Skver when I was 20 years old, that Rav Kook and Reb Amram Blau (1894 - 1974)26 really share their allegiance to Judaism’s fundamentals. This is something he articulated again and again, throughout his life.27

Torah Umadda is the most often misconstrued of Rabbi Lamm’s yesodos. In order to properly understand Rabbi Lamm, we have to understand the great depth of what Torah Umadda was to him. For some people, Torah Umadda is an ex-post-facto means to justify high school, college, and post- college education. For Rabbi Lamm, it was always so much more than that. He believed in the unity of creation. Since God is the Creator of the entire universe and all humanity, by extension, all exist- ence must be of significance to the man of God. That was his Torah Umadda. It was not simply a school or college curriculum. It was the grateful acceptance of the entirety of God’s handiwork. It was everything. I like to use the phrase “knowledge, beauty, and experience.” It was never about college credits.28 Rather, it was to encounter and connect with God everywhere. To Rabbi Lamm, Torah Umadda was far, far more than just a means to a livelihood.

Women’s issues are one of the greatest examples of Rabbi Lamm’s ability to change and adapt based on the world around him while still maintaining a Torah-true outlook. He gave a drasha on these topics in the Jewish Center on November 2, 1974. This was when bat mitzvah celebrations were just beginning among the Modern Orthodox, and he appeared hesitant and unsure of what to make of it. As he said, “You know, it seems like it might be a good idea, but it’s not traditional. I refer to a bat mitzvah ceremony which is not performed in the synagogue proper, in which an appropriate Torah spirit prevails, and okay, maybe someday I will become more accepting of a bat mitzvah.”29 These initial leanings eventually blossomed into his embrace of Talmud study for women, advocat- ing for and setting up the first serious Torah Shebe’al Peh studies in Stern College.30 Now, I offer this not to endorse any position on this issue. I am going to stay neutral as a referee here.31 I instead bring this up to demonstrate Rabbi Lamm’s openness to change within the confines of halachah and the ratzon Hashem. There was an ability to rethink and reevaluate.32 We see this process occurring again and again in his thinking.

And finally, we conclude with the all-embracing notion of moderation, which comes up frequently in his speeches and writings. Here I must make a personal confession. When I was a younger man, I never liked this attitude. I always felt people should say what they want to say, without any moderation. As a fiery youngin’, I was never happy with this form of circumscribed and forever nuanced qualified speaking and writing. Rabbi Lamm, in an essay titled “Peace And Truth,” talks about this moderation business. There he articulates three pillars of moderation, which are essential for understanding his views on the matter. In his words, a thinker should “attempt to accommodate both poles to the maximum extent possible if no conflict ensues, be wary of extremists who effectively rule out any one of the poles, as they sacrifice objectivity on the altar of consistency. And, as conditions change, reassess your choice.”33 Objectivity to Rabbi Lamm was forever nuanced and forever complex. Consistency was often proven to be false, because consistency insists that all truth is in one place. One always had to remember that life’s previous decisions may have been warranted by the circumstances then prevailing, but other options may be more appropriate for new and unanticipated situations. When he spoke of moderation, he spoke of a willingness to hear others and their opin- ions. When you have that willingness, then you lose the dogmatic position which rules out all other possible options. Of course, one must work within the framework of emunah and the Shulchan Aruch always, yet, one should be open to other possibilities and other understandings. The older I’ve

6 e gotten, the more I’ve come to like this formulation, because so many things in life do not present themselves to us as simplistic, but rather as nuanced and with many different options, bound by the absoluteness of the Torah framework. All camps of Orthodoxy are rooted in a legitimate apprehension of Torah and a legitimate response to reality. This, of all Rabbi Lamm’s doctrines, was one that gave me the most trouble. At this point in my life, however, I have learned to “take the fork in the road.”

Qualms

This next section will deal with a few qualms that I have with the philosophy of Rabbi Lamm. I was up very late last night, trying to formulate this properly in my mind. As I was walking down the hall to go to bed, I was debating whether or not to include this section, or to simply leave this whole presentation in a positive light. But, as I was turning off the light, I realized that he would not have minded if I raised questions. As a matter of fact, I could almost hear him saying , “Don't you dare not raise these questions!”34 So, I will not shy away from these subjects.35

The first issue is very painful to me, and there are echos of this pain everytime I read Rav Aharon Lichtenstein’s Mevakshei Panecha (p. 115), where he ponders whether he would have any oppor- tunity to utilize his extensive literary background in his new position as Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Har Etzion in Eretz Yisroel. When thinking about Rabbi Lamm’s Torah Umadda, I cannot help be- moan the consistent decline of the liberal arts and scholarship, in general, today, and the reduction of education to mere career functionalism. I am almost tragically accepting that these areas are fad- ing away as the Western world continues to embrace functionalism and utilitarianism over the realms of philosophy, literature, and the other humanities. How relevant will Torah Umadda be when the madda has been totally reduced to professions and paychecks? To be sure, this is not a problem with Rabbi Lamm himself. It is my belief that his assent to non-explicitly sacred wisdom is correct in the eyes of God. It is rather a concern over what will remain of this, his most cherished philosophy, in years to come.

My second qualm can be found primarily in his essay on women, in the two-volume tribute to Rabbi Dr. Haskel Lookstien.36 Rabbi Lamm attempts there to work through and explain the stated tiflus of women in Chazal, and its implications for our brachos and tefilos. Here again, I do not have a qualm with Rabbi Lamm so much as I myself am not yet at peace when confronted with these textual and doctrinal issues.37 Rabbi Lamm was a little more capable than I am of answering in an apologetic mode, but these ethical and moral quandaries still burden me. I feel we require some work there. Then again, I congratulate him and salute him for entering the ring to grapple with Andre the Giant in engaging with these difficult issues. But I'm not quite sure where that match has gone over the past 25 or 30 years.

My third issue goes back to a meeting that I had with Rabbi Lamm in 1977, right after I had become a rebbi in YHSQ. I was extremely shocked and upset when I got there. It wasn’t the students that were the issue. The whole experience of YHSQ is bathed in my memory with the enchantment of being a new rebbi, fulfilling a life’s dream to be in chinuch.38 But I came there from the Skverer Kollel, and my only other experience with yeshivos had been in Beis Shraga and Breuers’. Com- pared to them, YHSQ lagged very far behind. I don’t mean to condemn any individuals, but it was clear that as a whole, the basic shemiras hamitzvos was not on par with what I had experienced before or expected to experience then. Until that point, I had only known the world of Modern Ortho- doxy from Tradition, Kol Yavneh, Yavneh Review,39 and The Jewish Parent,40 as well as the books of Rabbi Lamm and those like him.41 My expectation, therefore, was that there would be students holding a biology book in one hand, studying it in order to inspire the recitation of a Tehillim held in the other. Needless to say, this was not the case. I was a little naive kid at the time, and this world was completely different from what I had expected.42 So, I scheduled an appointment to meet with

7 e Rabbi Lamm. Remember, I was coming from YHSQ in Holliswood, Queens, and I don’t drive. That meant that going to Rabbi Lamm entailed walking four blocks to Hillside Avenue, taking the Q43 to 179th Street, getting on the E train and riding it to 42nd Street. There, one continued by searching through the complex catacombs of 42nd Street Station, finding the A train, going uptown, and, finally, walking from the George Washington Bridge subway stop to YU. But I would do it again without batting an eyelash, I did so value the time I spent with him. Upon arriving, I asked Rabbi Lamm, “What was going on?” I described the neglect of many basic mitzvos, such as tzitzis, washing on bread, and bentching, as well as studied indifference to davening. This was not the world that I had read about! And, truth be told, his responses did not satisfy me

Many years later, at a conference of Modern Orthodox groups convened by Rabbi Lamm held over Thanksgiving weekend of 1993,43 I located him in the Homowack dining room Shabbos morning, pre -davening. As we both drank our coffees together,44 I asked him, “Rabbi Lamm, you spoke Thursday night to this crowd here; Why didn’t you speak to them about basic shemiras Torah umitzvos?”

He told me, “This community feels under attack constantly. I want to give them chizuk, I want to give them a positive experience to bring them closer.”45 All these years later, I'm still not completely satis- fied with that response. Bear in mind, his answer was very much that of a man who sought the positive, who sought to include, who sought to be mechazek by teaching and leading by example rather than by rebuke. But, I so believed in everything he taught that it hurts me to this day what I experienced there, in YHSQ and throughout my career as a educator. In other words, it's like a star coach with a game plan, a playbook, and yet his team loses week after week. You want to believe in the coach and his playbook, but things aren’t working out for the team. I half-excused this in my article for the Torah Umadda journal, where I wrote that the nature of the Modern Orthodox is to take in everyone, even those with a weaker background, so their “frumkeit statistics” are naturally going to be lower.46 But still, I make my way through the varied worlds of Orthodoxy on a daily basis, and there is still a great deal of work that needs to be done. This is my biggest issue; for all of Rabbi Lamm’s stirring philosophy, there is no comparison between the practicing religiosity of his world and that of the more right-wing Orthodoxies.47,48

Conclusion

I will conclude with another quote from Yogi Berra. “We enjoy ourselves together, even when we are not together.”49 Again, this is one of those quotes that appears silly on the surface, but has so much depth to it. So, I want to tell you a few parts of my life where I -- where all members of his world -- enjoy themselves together with Rabbi Lamm even now, when we are no longer together. When I look at creation, when I marvel at it and study it, I enjoy myself together with him even when we are not together. When I am learning or preparing a lecture, I enjoy myself together with him even when we are not together. And when I savor man’s search for the Divine in history and theology, I enjoy myself together with him even when we are not together.

There is a Slonimer vort that a rebbi should be like the Shul- chan Aruch: we learn from it constantly on a daily basis, and Rabbi Lamm Lecturing at Yeshiva University’s when necessary, we study it in depth.50 So everyday of my life, Harry Fischel Beis Medrash when I wrestle with problems of a theoretical or practical nature, and I weigh the claims of objectivity and consistency and whether truth precludes passion, I feel constantly that even though we are not together, we are still together. I think that this applies to all of Klal Yisroel, to all those who gained from Rabbi Lamm’s teachings and his person. .

8 e During the shiva, we kept hearing stories of personal kindnesses that Rabbi Lamm performed for individuals and communities alike. Hundreds of stories, and yet all the same: Someone who had no institutional claim to Rabbi Lamm had a serious kindness performed for them by him, purely out of the goodness of his heart. I said to Reb Shalom Lamm, at the shiva, that his father's life could be summed up by a possible book title, A Life Of A Thousand Kindnesses. His whole life was one of kindness, on a personal level, on a communal level, and on a spiritual and philosophical level.

I would like to conclude with two things. First, people search for titles to call Rabbi Lamm: Rosh Ye- shiva, Nasi, Hagaon. The title I've arrived at is... Tzaddik. To me, Rabbi Lamm was a Tzaddik in the truest sense of the word. Second, in the Litvishe velt they have a Rebbi, but in the Chasidishe velt they have a Rebbeh. A Rebbeh is someone who is concerned with every aspect of the lives of every member of Klal Yisroel, spiritually and physically, as individuals and as communities. Rabbi Lamm was not my Rebbi. He was my Rebbeh, and he will always be that. And I'm sure that his concern for Klal Yisroel has not faded where he is now. He is finding time to learn with his zeide, to learn with Rav Yoshe Ber, but he is still worrying about all of us as well.

I cannot ever repay my debt to him. He should be a melitz yosher for all of us, and his hadracha should accompany Klal Yisroel for all generations.

Endnotes

1.Toras Avos (Yeshivas Beis Avroham Slonim: n. d.) p. 236

2. Zohar, (Jerusalem: 1969) Terumah 128b

3. The 1937 trip for the eighth graders (one of which was probably a 14 year old Rabbi Lamm), was to Yankee Stadium, to see, on May 25th, the Detroit Tigers visit the Yankees. The Yankees featured four future Hall of famers, Bill Dickey, Joe DiMaggio, Lou Gehrig and Tony Lazzeri. The Tigers, 4-3 losers that day, had three Hall of Famers as starters in Mickey Cochrane, Charlie Gehringer and the greatest Jewish athlete of that era, Hank Geenberg. If Rabbi Lamm went, did he appreciate what he saw?

Stowaway was playing at the Roxy Theater, on 50th Street between 6th and 7th Avenues. In the spirit of elegant thea- ters of the time, it seated over five thousand. The eighth grade outing that day took the boys first to the Museum of Sci- ence and Industry, and then the Daily News building. Perhaps, Rabbi Lamm endured the film in order to savor his inter- ests in science and writing. We shall likely not know this side of Heaven.

Both trips are described in essays in Chronicle: Hebrew Parochial School 1937, written by Stanley Weissberg and Her- man Reichman respectively. (pp. 7, 13). Yes, the self designation of “Hebrew Parochial School” is that of Torah Vodaath.

For a sweeping view of the transformation of Torah Vodaath over the years, see the massive and heavily illustrated history, America's Yeshiva: Celebrating a Century of Torah Leadership in America (Yeshiva Torah Vodaath: 2019)

4. Conversation with Rabbi Lamm c. mid 1970s. Rav Baumol’s influence upon his grandson simply cannot be overstat- ed. Rabbi Lamm always kept a picture of Rav Baumol alongside one of Rav Soloveitchik on his desk. The Vizhnitzer Rebbe, R. Yisroel Hager (1860 - 1936), appointed the then twenty - six year old Baumol as rosh yeshiva in Vizhnitz, Roumania. Such was the young man's status as a talmid chacham than this was not his first rabbinic position. After the First World War, he came to America and served as Rov of the Adas Yeshurin shul on 135 Rodney Street, Williamsburg. His fame as posek was equaled by his humility and friendliness to all. In his written spiritual will he exhorted his children "to seek purity of soul . . .the means to this purity are first, depth study of Gemara . . .and performing mitzvos with love and desire . . .most important of all . . .is to love humanity and to judge them favorably, to be friendly and pleasant to all . . .prayer with great concentration is a profound purity. How is this achieved? By thinking about 'how great are Your works' and 'how deep are Your thoughts' until the heart becomes full of love and joy and tears of joy flow without the desire to cry." For the full text of this spiritual will as well as a searing and inspirational view of this unique man see, Emek Halacha Hashalem (Ginzei David: 2000) in the biography, pp. 13 -22.

At Rav Baumol’s first yahrzeit, Rabbi Lamm stated that his grandfather’s passing yielded “a most painful sentiment … of having lost a part of myself forever.” (“Remarks delivered on the occasion of the first yahrzeit (4 Elul) of Rabbi Yehoshua Baumol, zt”l”, September 1949”. This text was graciously supplied to me by Reb Menachem Butler.)

9 e Rav Baumol had a brother, Reb Yoel Moshe Baumol, who passed away in 1937. His son, R. Yoseph Yush Baumol, served as the head of the Yeshiva of Crown Heights. Thus, he was Rabbi Lamm's uncle, and is cited by him as one he also "learn(ed) with." Seventy Faces, Volume 1 (Ktav: 2002) p. 105.

Rabbi Lamm remained steadfastly loyal to many of the Chasidishe customs of his Tzanzer (maternal) and his Belzer (paternal) ancestors. He always prayed with Nusach Sefard despite serving many years in Ashkenaz congregations. Once asked by a precocious chossid who found himself in the Jewish Center on a Friday night why he had be- gun mincha with Ashrei and not Hodu (Psalms: 107) as is the Chasidic custom, Rabbi Lamm replied that he was well aware of the practice, that it is traced to the Baal Shem Tov, and that he tried at some point on Fridays to recite it pri- vately.

Also relevant in this context is the influence the Skulia Rebbe, R. Dovid Yitzchak Izak Rabinowitz (1896 - 1979) also had on Rabbi Lamm. Incidentally, the Skulia Rebbe lived on Bedford Avenue, around the corner from Rav Baumol's shul.

There has recently appeared a detailed study of Rabbi Lamm's personal amd philosophical debt to Chasidic rebbes and their teachings, "Rabbi Norman Lamm and the Spirit of Chassidism" by Eli Rubin, available at Chabad.org. At first glance this seems to be a most thorough and creative work. Thanks to Reb Menachem Butler for sending it to me.

5. Seventy Faces, ibid. op cit..

6. Brooklyn Polytechnic in the 1940s was located at 94 and 99 Livingston Street, which is just a few subway stops away from Rabbi Lamm's Williamsburg home. The decision to trek to Washington Heights to pursue higher levels of Torah was not an easy course on his part. Thanks are due here to the New York University public relations office, where Karl Philip Greenberg and archivist Lindsay Anderberg uncovered that old address. Today Brooklyn Polytechnic is no more. It was absorbed by NYU in the 1960s. The old sites where once young budding chemists studied is now a parking lot and a gym. Sic transit gloria mundi.

7. Rabbi Lamm's "Editor's Introduction to the New Journal" Tradition, (Volume I, Number 1) is required reading for those who seek to grasp the totality of this most complex man. It is a rallying cry for Orthodoxy, albeit in the contemporary idi- om, and most inspirational. It should have, in this writer's humble opinion, been included in Seventy Faces. I often get the sense -- and this will be a task for future biographers -- that he moved over the years from defining Torah faith, ex- plaining why certain movements and ideologies were not part of the mesorah to a point where he resolved that, "Okay, that has been clarified. Now, on to the task of teaching Torah to all Jews and welcoming them in."

8. The two largest Chasidic dynasties in the 19th century Ukraine were Rizhin and Tschernobil. R. Motel of Tschernobil (1770 -1837) was the father of eight children, each of whom founded a dynasty. The seventh son was R. Yitzchak of Skverer (1812 - 1885). His grandson, R. Yaakov Yoseph of Skverer (1900-1968), came to America in 1949, and eventually founded the Chasidic village of New Square in early 1957. He was the Skverer Rebbe to whom I became attached.

9. To what extent some of the derivative positions may, in fact, be objectively errant, or, whether some Larger Truth em- braces them all, is one that Rabbi Lamm often reflected upon.

10. Obviously, this formulation is a bit of an oversimplification. There are alternative codifications of Judaism’s basic beliefs and other poskim do figure into the chronology of accepted psak. For our purposes, however, this articulation will suffice.

11. This position has morphed over the years. There was a time when, outside of the staunch anti - Zionist circles, Rav Kook was a much respected, even venerated figure. The jury is still somewhat out on this as the more moderate yeshi- vish and chasidish worlds still maintain the more traditional respect. In my own situation, my defenses also included the secular-studies-embracing worlds of Kelem and Lyda, religious Zionism in general, Hirschianism, as well as Yeshiva Uni- versity. This was in keeping with my understanding of the basic parameters of Orthodoxy. My personal apprehension of any of the foregoing was always secondary to my belief that all Orthodox Jews are “in.”

12. The one exception was a philosophy professor at Notre Dame, who couldn't understand that I was not calling about a test or paper, and that I was not his student. The notion that a stranger might pursue thought in its own right seemed unthinkable to him. Nebech! He shall remain nameless.

13. The three most well stocked were Rabinowitz, Biegeleisen and Feldheim. Each had their particular allures. Each was presided over by their own unique “tour guides” through their cluttered, paradise-like interiors. There is a study here, of sorts, for an aspiring sociologist/historian. And, let the man who bestires himself to this tasty task not forget the many smaller stores such as Bernard Morgentern’s, snuggled across the street from Tiferes Yerushalayim on East Broadway, where you could find an out-of-print Tikkunei Zohar next to a treasure trove of Yiddish theater plays.

10 e 14. She told this story when introducing me to a women’s study group which she hosted, at various venues, public and private in Manhattan. I believe I spoke at Kehilath Jeshurun, but I am no longer sure.

15. Perhaps, if I had just made a few photocopies of those pages. . . But the kollel years are not awash in gelt.

Another underappreciated aspect of Rabbi Lamm’s legacy is as follows: In March of 1985, a heavily favored MTA hockey team lost the championship to Ramaz 5-2. Some of the boys on that Lions’ team wanted to bring me in as coach the next year, and the MTA administration was on the fence about it. Rabbi Lamm insisted I be hired, and, as some may know, the rest is a not unsuccessful history.

16. There are two collections of Berra’s wisdom, What Time is It? You Mean Now?: Advice for Life from the Zennest Master of Them All (Simon and Schuster: 2002) and When You Come to a Fork in the Road -- Take It: Inspiration and Wisdom from One of Baseball's Greatest Heroes (Hachette: 2001). For a detailed, yet, delightful biography of this humble and most kind Hall of Famer, see Yogi: A Life Behind the Mask by Joe Pessah (Little Brown and Company: 2020)

17. The Condition of Jewish Belief: A Symposium Compiled by the Editors of Commentary Magazine (Macmillan: 1966) Rabbi Lamm’s responses run from p. 123 to p. 132.

18. Commentary August 1996. Rabbi Lamm’s response may be found on the magazine’s website, and also in Rabbi Lamm’s Seventy Faces, Volume 1, pp. 100 - 103.

19. Tradition, Volume 1, Number 1, Summer 1968

20. Parenthetically, he told me, in the mid 1970s, that he maintained membership over the years in both Mizrachi and the Agudah, as he wanted to feel that he was a part of both of those worlds. I do not know if he continued this practice throughout the years.

21. In later years, he’d tell me that his failure to join those positing clear insight into the Divine Will post the 1967 victory drew him many harsh criticisms and actually cost him friendships.

22. Seventy Faces, Volume One, p.74

23. For a good summary of his strength in maintaining basic Torah standards in these areas, see Myles Kantor, “Rabbi Lamm Against the Zeitgeist”, https://medium.com/@MK79/rabbi-lamm-against-the-zeitgeist-2b47dcc8439

24. Rabbi Lamm’s approach to this painful and complex issue is presented in two essays in Seventy Faces, Volume 1, “Integrity or Unity: Which?” and “Seventy Faces.” pp. 135 - 159

25. Unfortunately, my source for this talk of Rabbi Lamm’s is from a copy in my possession that had the cover torn off years ago. Perhaps, someone knows the exact citation?

26. Reb Amram Blau was a Jerusalem activist in the right-wing circles of the Israeli section of Agudah, In the first Knes- set election, the Agudah split over whether to take part in the new state. R. Amram was a leader of the rejectionists who went on to establish the Aidah haChareidis. Despite his fierce kanaus (zealotry), he was very sweet dispositioned, and well loved by the Israeli police he battled and the jailors who imprisoned him.

27. Here, as elsewhere, Rabbi Lamm reached conclusions. He was a Zionist. Although he wrote respectfully, and re- searched many anti - Zionist thinkers thoroughly, he rejected their point of view. Did this mean that he felt a Torah opinion, although legitimately generated from authoritative texts, could be completely wrong, perhaps even immoral? I dis- cussed this with him the first night we spoke, and continued those reflections with him over the years.

28. In fact, he once wrote that those who think that secular studies are a sakanah cannot sanction them in any way for parnassah. The Chasidim are consistent as relates to madda, he maintained, since they don’t engage with it at all. But for the rest of us, he wrote, “How can we sanction a danger to emunah for the purposes of livelihood?” See Seventy Fac- es, ibid, p. 44

Caution, though, is relevant here for the aspiring Torah Umadda - ite. In order for the process to be of significance one must maintain a conscious awareness of the Divine periodically throughout the process.

29. Rabbi Lamm, non paginated Drosha given at The Jewish Center on November 2, 1974. The type written text may be found at [https://archives.yu.edu/gsdl/collect/lammserm/index/assoc/HASH79a7.dir/doc.pdf]. I discovered this gem when rereading Zev Eleff’s “How Bat Mitzvah Became Orthodox,” pp. 46 - 62, in his utterly delightful, densely factual and most

e thought provoking, Authentically Orthodox: A Tradition Bound Faith in American Life. (Wayne State: 2020)

30. See [https://thelehrhaus.com/commentary/forty-years-later-the-rav%E2%80%99s-opening-shiur-at-the-stern-college- for-women-beit-midrash/] for Rabbi Saul Berman’s recollection of those events and Rabbi Lamm’s role in them.

31. See Vern Buffey’s Black and White and Never Right: A Referee’s Story (Wiley: N.D) for a view of the agonies and difficulties involved in maintaining a referee’s neutrality when all around the partisan passions are heated. In fact, he would caution new referees and linesmen that when "they skate out on the ice, they should be aware that of the twenty thousand in the stands and the twenty players on each bench, it is only they, the three officials, who really desire a fairly officiated game." Kal v'chomer how difficult it is for one who has a personal or communal stake in a debate to maintain detached objectivity!

32. A few months ago, I was sitting in Mesivta Bais Shraga, where I work as a history teacher, speaking with a few of the talmidim. Somehow, I mentioned that in the Modern Orthodox world, Gemara study for women has become the norm. They did not think that this was so much evil as much as they thought that it was absurd or hilarious. I remember saying to them, “you know, if we go for a walk five minutes from where we are sitting, we’ll get to Vizhnitz. In Vizhnitz they are going to regard your sisters’ learning of Rambans on Mishpatim based on Bava Kamma and Bava Metzia as equally silly and ridiculous.” So again, one has to be careful about allowing one's particular cultural context to dictate assertions of objective truth.

On the other hand, a Religious Zionist educator, of American extraction, now teaching post High School year talmidim in Israel, told me, years ago, that not saying Hallel on Yom Ha’atzmaut renders one an apikores, thus demonstrating that childish and exclusionist definitions of Torah basics are not the sole possession of any particular camp

33. Rabbi Norman Lamm, “ ‘Peace and Truth’: Strategies for Their Reconciliation -- A Meditation” pp. 193 - 199 and par- ticularly p. 198, in Reverence, Righteousness, and Rahamanut: Essays in Memory of Rabbi Dr. Leo Yung, Edited by Ja- cob J. Schacter (Jason Aronson: 1992)

34. My internal monologue, June 6th, 2020.

35. If you wished to challenge or critique him, provided the questions were sincere, well mannered in presentation and somewhat thoughtful, he was more than willing to think long and hard with you. In fact, he found it a great joy.

36. Rabbi Norman Lamm, “Are Women ‘Lightheaded’? Three Troublesome Pages in Halakhic Literature” pp 469 - 484,in Rav Chesed: Essays in Honor of Rabbi Dr. Haskel Lookstein, edited by Rafael Medoff (Ktav: 2009).

37. And, it is an equally painful problem when confronting laws and statements about non - Jews.

38. There may have been a student at YHSQ that upset me but I certainly don’t remember any such. Life and the world were fresh and young and all “vibrations” were “good.”

39. Actually, the full history of Yavneh publications is a complex one. See, for the details of all the group’s offerings - which still warm my heart when recalling them nearly fifty years later - the chapter, “Publications: The Real, The Imag- ined” in Benny Kraut, The Greening of American Orthodox Judaism: Yavneh in the 1960s (Hebrew Union College: 2011). By the way, Yavneh was a national organization of Orthodox Jewish college youth who took a thoughtful presentation of their faith fairly seriously.

40. The Jewish Parent was Torah Umesorah’s publication, back when that organization, using today’s nomenclature, was both Modern and Chareidi. They featured writers and rabbis of all manner of Orthodox perspectives. The organization itself was led from 1948 till 1980 by the unique Rabbi Dr. Joseph Kaminetsky, who was respected by all camps. His memoir, Memorable Encounters: A Torah Pioneer's Glimpses of Great Men and Years of Challenge (Shaar: 1995) a splendid window into a much more unified Orthodoxy, is required reading for those who would know who we are and from whence we came.

41. Off the top of my head, I recall buying the works of Rabbis Samuel Belkin, Eliezer Berkowiz , Emanuel Rackman, and Leo Yung, among others, whose works lined the shelves of the aforementioned Lower East Side seforim stores.

42. In later years, due to an assortment of causes, the Torah standards in many segments of this community have rapidly improved. See my article, on this transformation, in Jewish Action, Summer 2003, “A Glass Half Full and Rapidly Filling.” pp. 37, 40 - 41

12 e 43. He was using heavy cream in the coffee, something I had never thought about, but over the years, I realized the insight he had in that regard as well.

44. The conference was the North American Orthodox Leadership Conference, which sought, as I understood at the time, to unify assorted Modern Orthodox groups. All that remains in my memory of that three day event is that all partici- pants got a blue carrying case, Leon Lett of the Cowboys' (yes, I watched the game in my room during some sessions) receiving team tried to pick up a punt on a snow covered field and fumbled, thus giving Miami the ball on the Dallas one, and my Shabbos morning schmooze with Rabbi Lamm.

45. It has been suggested to me by a young man about whom I am honored to say he once sat in my shiur, Rabbi Avro- ham Wein, now Rabbinic Intern at Congregation Beth Shalom in Lawrence, New York that there is an affirmation of this approach in Rabbi Lamm’s Chag Ha-Semikhah address, “The Self Image of the Rabbi,” delivered on March 29th 1981. Seventy Faces, Volume 2, pp.108 - 118.

46. In this article, “Torah Umadda and the Jewish Observer Critique: Towards a Clarification of the Issues,” I offered a response to criticisms of Rabbi Lamm from the Agudah world in their then - flagship journal, The Jewish Observer. Torah U-Madda Journal Volume 6 1995-1996, pp.58 - 91 [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/704645/rabbi-mayer- schiller/-torah-u-madda-and-the-jewish-observer-critique-towards-a-clarification-of-the-issues/]

47. What would we think today of the West Coast Offense if Bill Walsh and Joe Montana had not won all those Super Bowls?

48. My misgivings on this matter were well stated by R. Aharon Lichtenstein, in a letter he penned to the Forward newspaper (March 12, 1999) in the aftermath of the inaugural Edah Conference of 1999. He wrote, in a piece titled "Take Rav Soloveitchik At Full Depth," "Shallowness is, however -- and I say this as a friend rather than an adversary -- the Achilles' heel of Modern Orthodoxy. As such it elicited some of the Rav's sharpest critiques of religious modernism. Flaccid prayer, lukewarm commitment to learning, approximate observance, tepid experience -- anything that reflected comfortable mediocrity in the quality of acculturated American Judaism, he deplored and sought to eno- ble." R. Lichtenstein goes on to add that "the anti modernists" were also not "his ideal." For our purposes, though, I only note the reality of these difficulties and the need to analyze them honestly and seek their repair. For the full text see Zev Eleff, Modern Orthodox Judaism: A Documentary History, Foreword by Jacob J. Schacter (Jewish Publication Society: 2016) pp. 391 - 395. Thanks again here to the unique scholar, Reb Menachem Butler, who’s delight of all things Jewish, sweetens the pursuit of Torah knowledge for many. In this case he supplied me with the original text of the Forward.

49. Yogi, ibid. P. 497

50. Actually, it is from the first Rebbe of what would become the Slonimer line, R. Mordechai of Lechovitz (1774 - 1810). See Toras Avos, ibid, p. 239